The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete. j⚛e decker ^talk 01:27, 15 September 2014 (UTC) reply

Melissa Sue Robinson (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View log · Stats)

(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

WP:BLP of a person whose only reliably sourced notability is her unsuccessful runs for municipal office. Which means she fails WP:NPOL, and the volume of sourcing provided here doesn't adequately prove that she passes WP:GNG either. Founding the National Association for the Advancement of Transgendered People doesn't help, either, as the claim is entirely unsourced, the organization exists on Wikipedia only as a redirect to her and not as a standalone article, and a Google search doesn't suggest that it can be sourced well enough to stand alone as a separate article either. So what we've got is a person who's notable for running, but not winning, in a couple of municipal elections and for founding a non-notable organization — and for added bonus, the article was created by User:Melisrob1, strongly implying conflict of interest by the article subject herself. To me, that spells delete. Bearcat ( talk) 18:07, 30 August 2014 (UTC) reply

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Idaho-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k ( talk) 02:31, 31 August 2014 (UTC) reply

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Michigan-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k ( talk) 02:31, 31 August 2014 (UTC) reply

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Sexuality and gender-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k ( talk) 02:31, 31 August 2014 (UTC) reply

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Businesspeople-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k ( talk) 02:32, 31 August 2014 (UTC) reply

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Politicians-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k ( talk) 02:32, 31 August 2014 (UTC) reply

• Delete - Unsuccessful runs for local office do not meet either political or general notability guidelines. Robert McClenon ( talk) 14:30, 4 September 2014 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, NorthAmerica ¹⁰⁰⁰ 04:31, 7 September 2014 (UTC) reply

• Delete as per Bearcat and McClenon. I searched both names through numerous google passes, only possible reference I found was here. Subject doesn't meet WP:GNG.-- Tomwsulcer ( talk) 21:24, 11 September 2014 (UTC) reply

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.